Or this one, from Canada:

@elsajustelsa
This sign maybe you can throw away.

Or Mary Tanasse, an 87-year-old special snowflake with terminal cancer whose family pushed her through the march on her wheelchair. Her children called her "their matriarch" and when interviewed, she explained, "I asked them, please let me live until this march because it's so important to me to model what I feel is right for my family."

Hey, real quick -- what's that thing that happens when a bunch of special snowflakes collect in one place and get pissed off?

iStock/Lysogor
I'm sure it's not important and doesn't completely ruin this stupid buzzword or anything.

[subtitle]"Protests Are Fine Until [Insert Get-Out-Of-Protest-Free-Card Here]"[/subtitle]

Everyone who disapproves of the Women's March, or the people who protested the inauguration, will start their arguments with "I support your right to protest, unless," and then they add some unachievable ideal: "unless anyone involved destroys any property whatsoever" or "unless you disrespect the people who disagree with you," or "unless even one single Nazi gets punched."

I am referring, of course, to the guy who clocked Richard Spencer, a well-known something-or-other who describes himself as "alt-right," which is Nazi for "Nazi."

Sarah Burris

As you probably know, that incident set off a fiery and condescending internet debate that The New York Times summarized as "Is it O.K. to Punch a Nazi?" At first I was really conflicted about this debate, because. I had an interesting discussion about it on fucking Twitter, somehow (Twitter, I'm sorry I doubted you). But then I realized that this entire debate is stupid and it doesn't matter.

Protests are here to stay because they're effective and fun. Nazis are here to stay because ignorance and hate are tough ailments to shake, apparently. So it stands to reason that, eventually, another Nazi will get punched at a protest. But it's not actually that important. Discussing a Nazi getting punched by an anonymous Nazi-puncher when behind them is a massive demonstration against the sitting president of the United States is like worrying about the ammonia level in your fish tank while your friends battle acid-blooded aliens (from Aliens) in your living room.

20th Century Fox
Dude. Forget about your fucking Betta.

The fact of the matter is a couple million people across the entire country gathered to express their outrage at the government and, collectively, did less damage than a gang of drunk Red Sox fans or the average Cracked writer on a Thursday night. These are people who have had their humanity questioned and their personal physical safety threatened by the leader of the free world. I don't know how you can find their restraint anything less than inspiring, to be frank.

We can't let the conversation about protests be about one or two or a dozen people's mistakes, because people are constantly making various mistakes -- sometimes they atone for them, sometimes they don't. If you don't take a step back, get some context, and look at the whole picture, then you're gonna get eaten by a goddamn alien.

And yet I attended and somehow I survived. Not due to my masculine resilience, but because the fury of all these "scorned women" seemed to mostly manifest itself in supporting each other, inspiring each other, and sharing surprisingly clever pop-culture references.

JF Sargent
"Hey!" I shouted, "want a job?"
Then I remembered that I'm not important enough to make those decisions ever since I tried to hire my drug dealer as my personal assistant.

In my experience, people who are getting really violent at protests tend to get calmed down, or restrained and sent home, by other protesters.

But I also know my experience, and Saturday's country-wide peaceful vibe, isn't universal. So let's look at the big picture: Is there a trend of protesters getting violent? Turns out no: In a comprehensive analysis of Occupy Wall Street protests in 192 U.S. cities, UC Berkley found that when protests turn violent, it's usually the police's fault. The study isn't saying that the cops are picking fights on purpose or that they're strategically trying to make things become violent. It's just saying that police culture has moved in weird, unhealthy directions, and that by adopting "military formations" and carrying an AR-15 around a bunch of nonviolent protesters, those protesters tend to get upset, because guns are fucking scary to anyone who knows what they do and how they work.

Yeah, just a quick aside here, as a proud gun owner: downplaying people's fear of guns doesn't make you look tough, it makes you look like you don't have any experience with guns outside of video games.

iStock/kenlh
"I'm not scared of guns because my life is so easy that I have no need for survival instincts!"

I'm gonna be accused of being anti-cop in the comments, but I'm not -- I'm anti-violence. Protests are emotional things, by nature, and our country is built on their tradition. Everybody has a responsibility to keep them from resulting in injuries and death -- both the protesters and the cops. So if you find yourself, in every single instance, blaming one particular side for when things got bad, I guarantee you're not seeing the whole picture (particularly if that side is the one that doesn't have guns). And you can tweet as many photos of angry protesters spray-painting cop cars as you want, but at the end of the day, science tells a more complete story that is also, incidentally, more sympathetic to everybody than any partisan rant.

Weird how that works out -- it's like there aren't all that many evil people in the world, or something.